What changed

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A90000/2023),(A9-0023/2024),

A. whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the Commission proposal does not include any substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance;

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Recital 11

Or. en

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Recital 12

Or. en

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 6

Recital 32

Or. en

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 8 a (new)

Recital 40

Or. en

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 9

Recital 41

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Article 262 – paragraph 101 – point 15 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 273 – paragraph 1 a (new)2

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 288 – paragraph 31 – point c a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2815 – paragraph 31 – point ca

Or. en

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2923 – paragraph 4 a (new)2

Or. en

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2923 – paragraph 53

Or. en

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3026 – paragraph 4 a (new)2

Or. en

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3426 – paragraph 14 – point lc a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3426 – paragraph 1 – point m6

Or. en

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4426 – paragraph 38 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 9

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 10

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 11

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 12 a (new)

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point a

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point c

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 3

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 5

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 4

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point j

Amendment 30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point l

Amendment 31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point m

Amendment 32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 3

Amendment 33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 56 – paragraph 1

Or. en

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, until the adoption thereof in committee:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

29.6.2023

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Mr Adrián Vázquez Lázara

Chair

Committee on Legal Affairs

BRUSSELS

Ref.: IPOL-COM-AGRI D(2023)23992

Subject: Opinion on the Commission’s proposals for regulations on the unitary supplementary protection certificate and the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (COM(2023)0221 – C90152/2023 – 2023/126(COD)) and (COM(2023)0223 – C90149/2023 – 2023/128(COD))

Dear Mr Chair,

I refer to the Commission’s proposals for regulations on the unitary supplementary protection certificate [2023/0126 (COD)] and the supplementary protection certificate [2023/0128 (COD)] for plant protection products.

AGRI Coordinators considered the matter at their meeting of 23 May. They noted that the proposals are intended to complement the unitary patent system, and would not substantially modify the existing regime for supplementary protection certificate.

Unitary supplementary protection certificates are an important tool for this kind of products and for fostering innovation. Since the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, only very few substances have been approved while more and more substances are losing their approval, which leaves farmers with less tools to achieve the Union’s goals. We urge the Committee on Legal Affairs to consider the situation of farmers.

Consequently, Coordinators recommended not to give an opinion on the above legislative proposals and to convey this position to you.

This recommendation was endorsed by the AGRI Committee at its meeting on 6 July 2023.

Yours sincerely,

Norbert Lins

6.11.2023

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS

Mr Adrián Vázquez Lázara

Chair

Committee on Legal Affairs

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (recast) (COM(2023)0223 – C90149/2023 – 2023/0128(COD))

Dear Mr Chair,

The Committee on Legal Affairs has examined the proposal referred to above pursuant to Rule 110 on recasting of Parliament's Rules of Procedure.

Paragraph 3 of that Rule reads as follows:

“If the committee responsible for legal affairs considers that the proposal does not entail any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal, it shall inform the committee responsible for the subject matter thereof.

In such a case, over and above the conditions laid down in Rules 180 and 181, amendments shall be admissible within the committee responsible for the subject-matter only if they concern those parts of the proposal which contain changes.

However, amendments to parts of the proposal which remain unchanged may, by way of exception and on a case-by-case basis, be accepted by the Chair of the committee responsible for the subject matter if he or she considers that this is necessary for pressing reasons relating to the internal logic of the text or because the amendments are inextricably linked to other admissible amendments. Such reasons must be stated in a written justification to the amendments.”

Following the here attached opinion of the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the Parliament, the Council and the Commission, which has examined the recast proposal, and in keeping with the recommendations of the Rapporteur, the Committee on Legal Affairs considers that the proposal in question does not include any substantive changes other than those identified as such and that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing text, without any change in its substance.

In conclusion, at its meeting of 24 October 2023, the Committee on Legal Affairs unanimously decided to recommend that the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, proceed to examine the above proposal in accordance with Rule 110.

Yours sincerely,

Adrián Vázquez Lázara

Encl.: Opinion of the Consultative Working Party.

Annex

Brussels, 1 August 2023

OPINION

FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

THE COUNCIL

THE COMMISSION

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products

COM(2023)0223 of 27.4.2023 – 2023/0128(COD)

Having regard to the Inter-institutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts, and in particular to point 9 thereof, the Consultative Working Party consisting of the respective legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission met on 6 July 2023 for the purpose of examining the aforementioned proposal submitted by the Commission.

At that meeting, an examination of the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council recasting Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products resulted in the Consultative Working Party’s establishing, by common accord, as follows.

1. The deletion of recitals 13 and 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 should have been marked with the grey-shaded type generally used for identifying substantive amendments.

2. The following should have been identified as formal adaptations:

- in the title of the act, the replacement of the words ‘concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate’ with the words ‘on the supplementary protection certificate’;

- in Article 3(1), introductory wording, the adding of the word ‘and’;

- in Article 8(1), point (a)(iv) and point (c), the replacement of the words ‘to place’ with the words ‘for placing’;

- in Article 8(2), the replacement of the word ‘require’ with the word ‘provide’;

- in Article 12, the adding of the word ‘that’ and the deletion of the word ‘to’ before the words ‘be subject’.

3. In Article 3(1), point (b), and in Article 8(1), point (c), the words ‘medicinal product’ should be replaced by the words ‘plant protection product’.

In consequence, examination of the proposal has enabled the Consultative Working Party to conclude, without dissent, that the proposal does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such. The Working Party also concluded, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, that the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing legal text, without any change in its substance.

F. DREXLER E. FINNEGAN D. CALLEJA CRESPO

Jurisconsult Jurisconsult Director-General

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE